Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.RA/136/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 136 of 2011
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
SHAHENAZBANU
MAHEMUDKHAN PATHAN - Applicant(s)
Versus
RUKSHANABANU
CHANDBHAI SHAIKH & 5 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
SNEHAL PATEL FOR MR MITUL R DESAI
for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR.MRUDUL M BAROT for Respondent(s) : 1 - 5.
MR
LB DABHI ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
6,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 02/08/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Present
Criminal Revision Application has been preferred by the petitioner
– original complainant to quash and set aside the impugned
order dtd.22/2/2011 passed by the learned Additional City Civil
Judge, Court No.7, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc.Application No.280 of
2011 by which the learned Judge has rejected the application
submitted by the petitioner
for condonation of delay caused in preferring the Appeal against the
judgement and order passed by the learned trial court acquitting
the accused persons.
Having
heard Ms.Snehal Patel, learned
advocate appearing for Mr.Mitul Desai, learned advocate
appearing on behalf of the petitioner,
Mr.Mrudul Barot, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Mr.LB Dabhi, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the respondent No.6 and considering the impugned
order passed by the learned Judge, it appears that the impugned
order passed by the learned appellate court in not condoning the
delay is absolutely unreasoned and non-speaking order and no reasons
have been assigned by the learned Judge in not condoning the delay.
Except narrating the submissions made on behalf of the respective
parties in para 1 to 5, no reasons have been assigned and only in
six lines, the impugned order has been passed which cannot sustain.
Under the circumstances, without further entering into the merits of
the case, the impugned order passed by the appellate court in
Criminal Misc. Application submitted by the petitioner
for condonation of delay deserves to be quashed and set aside and
the matter is required to be remanded to the learned appellate court
for deciding the said application afresh in accordance with law and
on merits and to pass a speaking reasoned order.
In
view of the above, present Criminal Revision Application succeeds.
The impugned order dtd.22/2/2011 passed by the learned Additional
City Civil Judge, Court No.7, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc.Application
No.280 of 2011 in not condoning the delay is hereby quashed and set
aside and the matter is remanded to the appellate court for deciding
the said application afresh in accordance with law and on merits and
to pass a speaking reasoned order. Rule is made absolute
accordingly.
[M.R.
SHAH, J.]
rafik
Top